JPMorgan Chase has begun suing customers who allegedly stole thousands of dollars from ATMs by taking advantage of a technical glitch that allowed them to withdraw funds before a check bounced.
A Houston case involves a man who owes JPMorgan $290,939.47 after an unidentified accomplice deposited a counterfeit $335,000 check at an ATM, according to the bank.
“On August 29, 2024, a masked man deposited a check in Defendant’s Chase bank account in the amount of $335,000,” the bank said in the Texas filing.
The infinite money glitch episode highlights the risk that social media can amplify vulnerabilities discovered at a financial institution.
JPMorgan prioritized cases with large dollar amounts and indications of possible ties to criminal groups, they said.
Due to a technical glitch that allowed them to withdraw money before a check bounced, JPMorgan Chase has started suing customers who are accused of stealing thousands of dollars from ATMs.
Taking aim at some of the individuals who took out the largest sums in the so-called infinite money glitch that went viral on TikTok and other social media platforms in late August, the bank filed lawsuits in at least three federal courts on Monday.
In a Houston case, JPMorgan claims that a man owes the bank $290,939.47 after an unnamed accomplice deposited a fake $335,000 check at an ATM.
As stated in the Texas filing, “a masked man deposited a check in the amount of $335,000 in Defendant’s Chase bank account on August 29, 2024.”. Defendant started taking out the great majority of the illicitly obtained money as soon as the check was deposited. “.”.
JPMorgan, the largest U.S. S. bank by assets, is looking into thousands of potential cases involving the “infinite money glitch,” but it hasn’t revealed how much money was lost. Paper checks continue to be a major source of fraud, causing $26.6 billion in losses worldwide last year, despite their declining use as digital payment methods become more popular, according to Nasdaq’s Global Financial Crime Report.
The episode about the infinite money glitch emphasizes how social media can magnify flaws found at a financial institution. Videos of people rejoicing after taking large amounts of cash out of Chase ATMs soon after fraudulent checks were deposited started to circulate in September.
Typically, banks only release a portion of a check’s value until it clears, which can take a few days. According to JPMorgan, the loophole was closed a few days after it was identified.
The other lawsuits, which were filed Monday, are in the Central District of California and Miami courts. According to JPMorgan, the customers owe the bank amounts that range from roughly $80,000 to $141,000.
According to those with knowledge of the matter who wished to remain anonymous, the majority of cases the bank is looking into are for much smaller sums.
JPMorgan claims that despite reaching out to the alleged fraudster in each instance, its security team has not received payment for the fraudulent checks, which is against the deposit agreement that clients sign when opening an account with the bank.
As per the complaints, JPMorgan is requesting the return of the pilfered money along with interest and overdraft fees, in addition to legal fees and, in certain situations, punitive damages.
According to those familiar with the matter, the lawsuits are probably only the beginning of a series of legal actions intended to compel clients to pay back their debts and send a general message that the bank will not stand for deception. Large-value cases and signs of potential connections to criminal organizations were given priority by JPMorgan, they said.
The civil cases are distinct from possible criminal investigations; according to JPMorgan, it has also forwarded cases to law enforcement authorities nationwide.
JPMorgan spokesperson Drew Pusateri told CNBC that fraud is a crime that affects everyone and erodes confidence in the banking system. “We are actively working with law enforcement and pursuing these cases to ensure that anyone who commits fraud against Chase and its customers is held responsible.”. “.”.
